Reviews from Amazon

Insights of genius

Creativity in science and art isn't something that can be readily produced. In Insights of genius : Imagery and Creativity in science and art Arthur I Miller discusses various aspects of creativity and its link to visual images. One thing he looks at is the distinction between visualization and visualizability - for instance Feynman diagrams are a useful tool in quantum theory, but do they actually show what is happening at the micro-level? Miller also examines the outburst of creativity at the start of the 20^th Century, considering the work of Poincaré, Einstein and Picasso amoung others, and looking at interactions between them.

There's a lot of material in this book - philosophy of science, artistic creativity and even a bit of neuroscience of vision. I felt that Miller didn't really provide a thread to tie all of this material together - the book seemed to be a bit rambling at times, and it would have been better to concentrate on one subject and so create a shorter book. On the other hand, the book would be useful for stimulating discussion - I could envisage the members of a reading group reading a chapter each week and meeting to discuss it.

Amazon.com info

Paperback 504 pages
ISBN: 0262631997
Salesrank: 580775
Weight:1.4 lbs

Published: 2000 The MIT Press

Amazon price $27.00

Marketplace:New from $14.99:Used from $5.95

Buy from Amazon.com

Amazon.co.uk info

Paperback 504 pages
ISBN: 0262631997
Salesrank: 527501
Weight:1.4 lbs

Published: 2000 MIT Press

Amazon price £11.84

Marketplace:New from £9.41:Used from £8.74

Buy from Amazon.co.uk

Amazon.ca info

Paperback 504 pages
ISBN: 0262631997
Salesrank: 735095
Weight:1.4 lbs

Published: 2000 The MIT Press

Amazon price CDN$ 17.07

Marketplace:New from CDN$ 17.07:Used from CDN$ 20.00

Buy from Amazon.ca

Product Description
How can new knowledge be created from already existing knowledge? Insights of Genius shows how seeing is central to the greatest advances of the human intellect. Artists and scientists alike rely on visual representations of worlds both visible and invisible. Insights of Genius, first published by Copernicus in 1996, explores the creative leaps that led some of the greatest scientists and artists to dramatically transform how we understand nature. The scope of figures runs from Galileo and da Vinci to Einstein and Picasso. Focusing on the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the age of modern art and modern physics, the book travels through the philosophy of mind and language, cognitive science, neurophysiology, and art history. Insights of Genius discusses intuition, aesthetics, realism, representation, metaphors, and visual imagery. Allied to these concepts are causality, relativity, energy conservation, entropy, the correspondence principle, scientific creativity, and Cubism. Running through the book is the idea that science extends our intuition from common sense to an understanding of a world beyond our perception.

Product Description

How can new knowledge be created from already existing knowledge? Insights of Genius shows how seeing is central to the greatest advances of the human intellect. Artists and scientists alike rely on visual representations of worlds both visible and invisible.

Insights of Genius, first published by Copernicus in 1996, explores the creative leaps that led some of the greatest scientists and artists to dramatically transform how we understand nature. The scope of figures runs from Galileo and da Vinci to Einstein and Picasso. Focusing on the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the age of modern art and modern physics, the book travels through the philosophy of mind and language, cognitive science, neurophysiology, and art history. Insights of Genius discusses intuition, aesthetics, realism, representation, metaphors, and visual imagery. Allied to these concepts are causality, relativity, energy conservation, entropy, the correspondence principle, scientific creativity, and Cubism. Running through the book is the idea that science extends our intuition from common sense to an understanding of a world beyond our perception.

Disappointing read **
As a lay reader of the history of science, I expected this book to provide a cogent study of scientific creativity and its parallels in art. I was very disappointed to find the author jumping from one subject to the next, often repeating his language verbatim. His self-congratulatory tone put me off as well. While I appreciate the careful research that must have gone into a book of such ambition, its failure to achieve clarity and momentum left me frustrated.

Disappointing read **

As a lay reader of the history of science, I expected this book to provide a cogent study of scientific creativity and its parallels in art. I was very disappointed to find the author jumping from one subject to the next, often repeating his language verbatim. His self-congratulatory tone put me off as well. While I appreciate the careful research that must have gone into a book of such ambition, its failure to achieve clarity and momentum left me frustrated.

insights not very insightful *
if you have not yet read this book then please dont becasue it is a complete waste of time. is there no limit to how arrogant a writer can get, the flow is incoherent, consatntly skipping from one subject matter to another without ever clearly explaning any of them. Also related is Einstien and Picasso another Miler book not worth reading at all. This book he claims is the deinitive work on Einstien, but it is not much more than a uncomplete biography which would not even cover the facts needed for a GCSE project. Waste of time! he talks about creativity, no where is it seen in any of these two books

insights not very insightful *

if you have not yet read this book then please dont becasue it is a complete waste of time. is there no limit to how arrogant a writer can get, the flow is incoherent, consatntly skipping from one subject matter to another without ever clearly explaning any of them. Also related is Einstien and Picasso another Miler book not worth reading at all. This book he claims is the deinitive work on Einstien, but it is not much more than a uncomplete biography which would not even cover the facts needed for a GCSE project. Waste of time! he talks about creativity, no where is it seen in any of these two books

Fascinating mix of science history and philosophy. *****
Whereas the author's main thesis concerns imagery and intuition as they help (or hinder) scientific progress, I liked this book more simply for its historical detail. Also, it was fascinating for his summaries of philosophy of science (and history of philosophy of science). It is not a book for the science phobic but it is not overly technical. One nice feature is that the philosphical issues continue right up to the "science wars" of the 1990's. It is an excellent book for all students of science

Fascinating mix of science history and philosophy. *****

Whereas the author's main thesis concerns imagery and intuition as they help (or hinder) scientific progress, I liked this book more simply for its historical detail. Also, it was fascinating for his summaries of philosophy of science (and history of philosophy of science). It is not a book for the science phobic but it is not overly technical. One nice feature is that the philosphical issues continue right up to the "science wars" of the 1990's. It is an excellent book for all students of science

Important work on visual thinking *****
I found this book a revelation. It's one of the best things I've read on the role of visual thinking in science--especially in Einstein's work, a subject on which Miller is probably the world's leading expert. If you want to understand something about why quantum theory seemed so unimaginably foreign for much of the twentieth century, and why Feynman's contribution is so important, this is the book to read. But it is not for the unsophisticated. Speaking of which, of the preceding reviews I will say only that talent recognizes genius, but mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself. Miller knows something about genius.

Important work on visual thinking *****

I found this book a revelation. It's one of the best things I've read on the role of visual thinking in science--especially in Einstein's work, a subject on which Miller is probably the world's leading expert. If you want to understand something about why quantum theory seemed so unimaginably foreign for much of the twentieth century, and why Feynman's contribution is so important, this is the book to read. But it is not for the unsophisticated. Speaking of which, of the preceding reviews I will say only that talent recognizes genius, but mediocrity knows nothing higher than itself. Miller knows something about genius.

Perhaps the Author should consider limmiting the scope *
The key flaw of this book is held within it's title. to offer insite on genius is a massive task and one that should have been taken a little more cautiously in my view. Miller is clearly most comfortable in the regurgitation of theories and in this he is relatively sucessfull however a analysis of those theories would have been appreciated. The Real problems start when Miller (...) tries to offer his own views on the scentists and artists regarded here. Miller is clearly defined by his background in physics. I would however guess he is from the historical appreciation rather than practice(either theoretical or practical) and this is brough out by his rather 'pop science' approach to the ideas expoused within. Instead of following the progression of theory he instead covers this with the view that it takes a great deal of work to be a geneous and that there may be some ill defined spark. Worse yet the understanding of the theories discussed seems to lack judgement and connection between theory... Phsycology it would seem would have more answer to the questions he poses and this is where the next failing is shown. Miller... is forced to limmit his insight to his reading which is in turn limmited in scope (as is his appreciation of Aesthetics, Art History, Mathematics) and you often get the feeling he would have been better off restricting his works to a strict history of science with no movement towards interpretation of theory. This is not to say the book has no worth, there are few books with the ego to cover the topics held here. However I would recomend any reader intrested first understand the scientific theories and then read books on phsycology to fill in the rest, in my opinion Miller offers nothing over a Bsc Cog Sci students initial reaction to the fields covered and is severly lacking in understanding and depth on many of the areas covered here.

Perhaps the Author should consider limmiting the scope *

The key flaw of this book is held within it's title. to offer insite on genius is a massive task and one that should have been taken a little more cautiously in my view.

Miller is clearly most comfortable in the regurgitation of theories and in this he is relatively sucessfull however a analysis of those theories would have been appreciated.

The Real problems start when Miller (...) tries to offer his own views on the scentists and artists regarded here.

Miller is clearly defined by his background in physics. I would however guess he is from the historical appreciation rather than practice(either theoretical or practical) and this is brough out by his rather 'pop science' approach to the ideas expoused within.

Instead of following the progression of theory he instead covers this with the view that it takes a great deal of work to be a geneous and that there may be some ill defined spark.

Worse yet the understanding of the theories discussed seems to lack judgement and connection between theory...

Phsycology it would seem would have more answer to the questions he poses and this is where the next failing is shown. Miller... is forced to limmit his insight to his reading which is in turn limmited in scope (as is his appreciation of Aesthetics, Art History, Mathematics) and you often get the feeling he would have been better off restricting his works to a strict history of science with no movement towards interpretation of theory.

This is not to say the book has no worth, there are few books with the ego to cover the topics held here. However I would recomend any reader intrested first understand the scientific theories and then read books on phsycology to fill in the rest, in my opinion Miller offers nothing over a Bsc Cog Sci students initial reaction to the fields covered and is severly lacking in understanding and depth on many of the areas covered here.

Disjointed *
The main problem with this book is organisation of ideas. Because of this, you will be hard pressed to understand what Arthur I. Miller is really trying to tell us. One moment, he is discussing atoms, then he talks about quantum theory, then about Galileo's thought experiments, then about Einstein's Relativity, and then about how our brains process information. There is no coherence in discussion but topics are brought up randomly only to be replaced by equally random topics. Just when you thought discussion on quantum theory is over and done with, this topic comes up again in later chapters, and the cycle of random topics start again. Consequently, I really had a hard time trying to piece together different ideas discussed in this book. It is almost as if Arthur I. Miller drops all the facts at once on your desk and leaves you to sort out what the facts mean.

Disjointed *

The main problem with this book is organisation of ideas. Because of this, you will be hard pressed to understand what Arthur I. Miller is really trying to tell us. One moment, he is discussing atoms, then he talks about quantum theory, then about Galileo's thought experiments, then about Einstein's Relativity, and then about how our brains process information. There is no coherence in discussion but topics are brought up randomly only to be replaced by equally random topics. Just when you thought discussion on quantum theory is over and done with, this topic comes up again in later chapters, and the cycle of random topics start again. Consequently, I really had a hard time trying to piece together different ideas discussed in this book. It is almost as if Arthur I. Miller drops all the facts at once on your desk and leaves you to sort out what the facts mean.